If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Bissen is just being an idiot that has no idea what he's talking about on any level like usual.

Aww cutie pie. I really must have stepped on your measly ego. You guys are like a pack of squirrels that got their nuts taken.

Hilarious shit hombre

Originally Posted by palo god

Building seven didn't collapse into it's own footprint.

Watch it again. It falls straight down for over 30 floors. Path of greatest resistance.

Which means that by some incredible coincidence the entire building have been damaged equally throughout its entire structure. Else it would have buckled, slowed and fallen to the side of least resistance. Like any other object that has had partial damage and is waiting for gravity to do its job. Instead it fell at free fall velocity. Straight down.

I'm convinced pirate glen is a big troll, that's the only way someone could actually claim there was no vertical i-beams in building 7, or they melted, or hell i'm not even sure what he thinks happened to them. the i-beam delusion.

I'm convinced pirate glen is a big troll, that's the only way someone could actually claim there was no vertical i-beams in building 7, or they melted, or hell i'm not even sure what he thinks happened to them. the i-beam delusion.

Truthers with the constant strawman... putting words in my mouth is the only way to could even attempt to not look foolish with your nonsense conspiracy.

Originally Posted by Reigngod

Deductive reasoning has noing to do with logic. In fact deductive reasoning is illogical. Go define logic and come back to the discussion an educated man.

Truthers with the constant strawman... putting words in my mouth is the only way to could even attempt to not look foolish with your nonsense conspiracy.

30 floors. Straight down. You can not explain it with hilarious shit like "They designed it like that". Steel don't just simultaneously decide to pop out of their weldings and throw away the nuts and bolts. It fucking bends and buckles because it's strong as fuck. Which is why the fuck you use steel to build skyscrapers.

You are the one speaking nonsense. But then again. You take anything coming from authority for given.

Start at about the minute mark. It calls the lack of water that you suggest into question.

Multiple eyewitness reports suggested they were only getting a trickle. One explanation is friction loss. The amount of distance and the narrowness of the pipes can have the water come out as a trickle despite the alternate sources of pressure.

Originally Posted by Reigngod

Deductive reasoning has noing to do with logic. In fact deductive reasoning is illogical. Go define logic and come back to the discussion an educated man.

Multiple eyewitness reports suggested they were only getting a trickle. One explanation is friction loss. The amount of distance and the narrowness of the pipes can have the water come out as a trickle despite the alternate sources of pressure.

For an idiot I would think that even you would understand that a system that rates fire resistance based on time, that you would understand that that time indicates how long it will be safe for. The core columns for WTC 7 required 3 hour fire resistance... 4 hours less than the duration of the fire. I'm not sure what makes you think an office is short on burnable fuel.

Dont even try it futile. This is from people who are amazed at black smoke at a fire seen and have not realized the plethora of toxic plastic crap there is in everything from rugs to computer monitors which will burn black.

Why would you ask like that was ludicrous? You believe the official story. I don't.

Yes I believe that. TV is the greatest tool of propaganda. The effects of billions of people watching the two most recognizable buildings in the world, in the country with the greatest military power, get hit by planes and watching them turn to dust, while news anchors across the board do the "Osama Bin Laden" parrot within an hour of the first plane hitting, is unparalleled as a tool for legitimizing war and police state measures.

Why would you ask like that was ludicrous? You believe the official story. I don't.

Yes I believe that. TV is the greatest tool of propaganda. The effects of billions of people watching the two most recognizable buildings in the world, in the country with the greatest military power, get hit by planes and watching them turn to dust, while news anchors across the board do the "Osama Bin Laden" parrot within an hour of the first plane hitting, is unparalleled as a tool for legitimizing war and police state measures.

Okay so the government chose what the conspiracy theorists and many experts believe to be an inefficient way of taking down a building as a cover to take down a building because it would look cool and therefore memorable. Yet at the same time they must've also known that it was a bad way of blowing up a building, which is why they rigged it first.

So essentially the government chose to make it look suspicious in order to create a spectacle, despite the fact that two of the most recognisable buildings being reduced to rubble would have been just as memorable as the JFK shooting anyway.